What are the effects of partisanship on presidential stewardship of the domestic economy? Use evidence to support your points

What will be an ideal response?

The ideal answer should:
a. Discuss how while it is not clear that the president has that much influence over the economy, it is clear that there is partisan difference that correlates to domestic economic performance.
b. Explain how Democratic presidents have presided over economic growth rates that are nearly 2 percentage points higher than those under Republican presidents and how, for the forty-nine quarters since 1947 in which the economy has been in a recession,Republicans have been in power for forty-one of them.
c. Engage with the research of Blinder and Watson to assess the meaning of these data,noting how the partisan differencedepends on more than just presidential luck and what presidents do themselves, but also on factors beyond their control, for example, Democrats have occupied the White House during times of robust global growth and have waged war (which tends to boost defense budgets) while Republicans have been in power through some of the more catastrophic global economic events, such as the two oil shocks.
d.Note that although luck and external factors may not explain all of the partisan gap, Blinder and Mann's research shows that it cannot be attributed to deliberate policymaking alone.
e.Identify that the correlations suggest that there may be something about a Democratic president that inspires confidence in citizens, but what that is, the researchers cannot say.